What is the big deal with Hegel for you fags?

[Anonymous No.22484277]

Honestly, you all must be illiterate. It's disgusting. Hegel is not obscure, he does not play "word games," he simply catalogues and systematizes the entire progression of philosophical knowledge and history leading up to his publication. I mean, I guess if you went to PUBLIC SCHOOL and do not have education in the CLASSICS you might find a masterpiece like Phenomenology of Spirit taxing? But this is YOUR PROBLEM. Hegel is an EXTREMELY CLEAR and LITERAL writer - perhaps you are too DYSGENIC and ILLITERATE to juggle more than one page of philosophical cognitions in your working memory!

[Anonymous No.22484291]

>>22484277
you got an onlyfans or something?

[Anonymous No.22484416]

>>22484277
Last time I was in a Hegel thread I asked simple questions about the definition of consciousness in hegel and you were not able to give me any substantive answer. All you can do is recite shit from the text, likely the reason you think Hegel is meaningful is because you have no capability to grasp meaning in the first place.

[Anonymous No.22484465]

People hate Hegel because he does actual hard philosophical work instead of self-help bullshit that reaffirms prior religious biases.

If you don't understand hegel, then you can't understand any modern philosophy because all modern philosophy is either a critique, extension, or sythesis of hegel's works

[Anonymous No.22484511]

>>22484277
re: the Rilke letter

"He kept showing his early work to other people. Well, stop doing that!"

[Anonymous No.22484876]

>>22484277
>Papyrus

[Anonymous No.22484923]

>>22484416
consciousness is just the subject-object structure of experience! literally chapter 1!! ILLITERATE!!
>>22484291
ILLITERATE phone addicted CRACKWHORE!
>>22484465
yes i think so too anon! i agree with you!
>>22484511
he was dealing with a child out of wedlock! cut the young ambitious statesman some SLACK after all he gave you EVERYTHING you know about PHILOSOPHY and TRUTH!!
>>22484876
ILLITERATE!!

[Anonymous No.22484945]

Ive been calling him a charlatan since day one and haven't read him. I guess its just because I like Schopenhaur more (who I haven't read either) and also the school of life video painted him that way

[Anonymous No.22485209]

>>22484277
The only thing I don’t like about Hegel is his typical fanbase

[Anonymous No.22485217]

>>22484945
>t. literally every hegel hating schopenhauerfag

[Anonymous No.22485274]

>>22484923
you sound like your verbal IQ doesn't even crack the triple digits

[Anonymous No.22485282]

>>22485274
that's because it doesn't. True hegelians sound like this:

>THE ONE TRUE SYSTEM OF PHILOSOPHY transcends German Idealism or any particular philosophical school. It is only their accidental presentation that is unique to the Germans; the Truth itself, as a single universal reality, is one and the same for all who've attained it, Greek, German, or otherwise. It just so happens the German presentation was the first PUBLIC demonstration of what was previously reserved for private initiation. The Hegelian doctrine is a formalization of the Platonic hidden doctrine, the occult philosophy.

[Anonymous No.22485302]

>>22484923
>consciousness is just the subject-object structure of experience! literally chapter 1!! ILLITERATE!!
What does this say? It just restates the question. I know consciousness gives the appearance of what we call a subject and an object. But what is it?

[Anonymous No.22485327]

>>22485302
>But what is it?
it can only be defined indexically-- and therefore you already know what it is (assuming you are not a p-zombie)

[Anonymous No.22485354]

>>22485327
Yes that's how words work. I have no idea what it is, we've just established that we're pointing at the same thing. Is this the power of formal philosophy? We point at things using verbose language and say we accomplished something?

[Anonymous No.22485370]

>>22485354
>Is this the power of formal philosophy?
yes that's why the next phase is SPECULATICE THINKING.

>Absolute Truth can be attained through acquaintance knowing only by those who are the truly initiated. Being initiated
actually means not only being of the correct philosophical temperament but also being thoroughly practised in dialectic. Hence, dialectic or propositional knowledge has a role to play in the attainment of this ultimate knowing. It helps open and direct the "eye of the soul" (the noetic acquaintive faculty, or illuminative intuition) to its proper object
correlate.

>The initiates are certainly given hints to the existence ofa secret doctrine. Cornford is right to say that Socrates' failure to define knowledge in propositional terms. in the Theaetetus, definitely points the way towards the inadequacy of propositional knowledge to attain the final revelation. The revelation is the direct acquaintance knowing of the Forms, but of course this is left unstated. In passages, from the Republic, there is an indication that the truths revealed by dialectic are not ultimate. Socrates tells Glaucon that it appears that dialectic brings us to the end of philosophical enquiry. However, he then hints that there is a further path to ultimate knowledge that dispenses with images and symbols and attains truth directly.

[Anonymous No.22485415]

>>22485370
We're already initiated by the Egyptians, Ionians and Hebrews. I already know about the awesome power of speculative thinking and multigenerational system building. The truths that are attainable directly can't be subject to any system, they're what the systems are built on.
When a structure reflects divinity, direct truth, people notice it and it becomes a cultural anchor that new attempts to approach truth are built on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHNLdHe8uxY
Seems to me religions did all this stuff way better, these modern philosopher jackoffs aren't adding anything.

[Anonymous No.22485434]

>>22485415
>these modern philosopher jackoffs aren't adding anything.
except presenting the truth unveiled without myth or allegory. just because you got filtered doesn't mean there's nothing there smoothbrain.

[Anonymous No.22485445]

>>22485434
If you think you're not using what's essentially an allegory or metaphor to represent truth you're no long representing truth or even seeking it, you've found dogma to latch on to. Your ideas are not truth, they're stories that can occasionally reflect or point to some fragment of truth, poorly and every time that happens it's a monumental victory for the human race that echoes through generations.

[Anonymous No.22485453]

>>22485415
>The truths that are attainable directly can't be subject to any system, they're what the systems are built on.
also false brainlet. Speculative truth supervenes on the propositional truths by, through, and only at the END of the dialectic through which the system as a WHOLE is manifested.

>what logic is cannot be stated beforehand, rather does this knowledge of what it is first emerge as the final outcome and consummation of the whole exposition.

[Anonymous No.22485467]

>>22485445
>If you think you're not using what's essentially an allegory or metaphor to represent truth you're no long representing truth or even seeking it, you've found dogma to latch on to
wrong again thinklet

>The element of truth is the Concept/Notion (Begriff), and its true form the scientific system

[Anonymous No.22485503]

>>22485453
>END of the dialectic through which the system as a WHOLE is manifested.
Typical religious zealotry with nothing to offer.
What logic is can't be built up using logic. You can't describe what logic fundamentally is using logic and that includes language. Every time you start making a statement about anything you've already appealed to logic and so failed to explain it. You're still working within the system you're trying to explain like pac man trying to describe the arcade machine through appeals to his half-baked ideas about virtual fruit, that exist as a result of the machine he's describing.
>>22485467
>the scientific system
The planet is like a sphere, but it's not a sphere, it's analogous. Modelling it as a sphere is close enough for most purposes. Newton is right but so is Einstein. They're all just approximate models, there's nothing special about them. A map based on rigorous science is still just a map, it doesn't become magic. The standard physics model does not explain its fundamental parts like logic, those are the building blocks we appeal to and build our systems / models on.

You're just proving the point that Hegeltards only care about jerking off, there's no actual content there.

[Anonymous No.22485512]

>>22485503
> there's no actual content there.
yeah no shit its funny that you even bother with these people

[Anonymous No.22485535]

>>22485503
>not every one is bound to study Metaphysics, that many minds will succeed very well, in the exact and even in deep sciences, more closely allied to intuition [what can be sensed], while they cannot succeed in investigations dealing exclusively with abstract concepts. In such cases men should apply their talents to other subjects.
sorry you got filtered anon. try math or physics instead.

[Anonymous No.22485537]

>>22485535
*forgot obligatory Kant and Hegel picrel

[Anonymous No.22485545]

>>22485535
My intuitive thinking levels are off the fucking charts, the best intuition, everyone says so. Metaphysics is an interesting subject but you don't demonstrate any understanding of it despite all Hegel supposedly taught you.

[Anonymous No.22485546]

>>22485545
>My intuitive thinking levels are off the fucking charts, the best intuition, everyone says so.
>filtered by Hegel
lol ok

[Anonymous No.22485554]

>>22485546
You tried to point out examples of said filtering but even if Hegel was saying something interesting in these cases you don't show any understanding of that deeper meaning. You show confusion about things that should be relatively basic.

[Anonymous No.22485563]

>>22485554
>You show confusion about things that should be relatively basic.
ironic because you have it backwards. you got filtered and are now projecting it on to me to cope.

[Anonymous No.22485572]

>>22485563
You think logic will be accounted for by a logical scientific model. That shows confusion about the absolute basics needed to accomplish anything. You don't understand the basics of how to make any statement or build up any understanding of anything and then complain about how reasonable, practical people don't understand your incoherent nonsense.

[Anonymous No.22485608]

So is Hegel just another scam for people with superiority complexes?

[Anonymous No.22485611]

>>22485563
>No you
The state of hegeltards

[Anonymous No.22485622]

>>22485302
you accuse hegeloids of word-games and refuse to accept a simple answer because it doesn't answer to esse, which is a projection of the intentional relation in the first place. dipshit. go read some Heidegger before you try these "gotcha" games with me.

[Anonymous No.22485635]

>>22485467
yes but at the end of phenomenology the experiential (basically gnostic in the sense of gnosis) temperament required for absolutely cognizing one's thought of Being (ie, required for reading the System, Science of Logic) is allegorized. or did you not read that far?

[Anonymous No.22485644]

>>22485572
>model
u really are ngmi. you presuppose the normie metaphysik and yet accuse hegelposters of not understanding the basics, when it's you who brings presuppostional baggage to the debate and then wonders why you can't understand. In all seriousness have you read Hume at least?

[Anonymous No.22485647]

>>22485644
*forgot obligatory picrel

[Anonymous No.22485723]

>>22485647
the "normie metaphysic" poster is a Straussian-Trotskyite trying to rescue Kant by making him "always already" Hegel. not to be taken seriously. Kant wanted to ground philosophy and science, particularly geometrical physics. he did not conceive of his project - as Hegel does in the Phenomenology - as a critique of "everyday" consciousness, but as an investigation of the limits and powers of the most educated class of thinkers perhaps of all time. this kind of entryist revisionism - parlor trick, really - is immediately obvious and sets upon his guard anyone who has studied the classics, particularly the military strategists; so it's no surprise that these vague allusions to a "secret doctrine" and the intimation that the reader has been let in on something to which "the masses" aren't privy have proven effective and persuasive in this shithole forum.

[Anonymous No.22485768]

OP you're doing a shit job of explicating Hegel's arguments and a great job of convincing people that Hegel readers are pretentious fart-huffing pseuds.
Look at posts like >>22463652 >>22463842 >>22463854 from the other thread - that anon makes an effort to explain things and answer questions, while you just call people illiterate fags for not immediately reaching Absolute Knowing after momentarily glancing at an image macro of Hegel dabbing or some shit.
Hegel does hold the reader's hand as they progress through his works, particularly the Phenomenology, but he presupposes a level of knowledge of philosophy and of his terminology that can be hard to penetrate, and giving people scorn and derision when they have such difficulty does nothing for anyone except maybe make you feel superior and smug for a moment.

[Anonymous No.22485830]

>>22485768
>giving people scorn and derision when they have such difficulty does nothing for anyone except
separate the wheat from the chaff

[Anonymous No.22485843]

>>22485830
Go into academia if that's what you want. We're on an anonymous image board founded to discuss Japanese cartoons, if you haven't noticed - make an effort to explain your position and enter into dialog with people and you can have wonderful discussions, as seen elsewhere in the catalog, but if you do the opposite and deliberately raise the barrier to entry to your discussion then you'll just get crickets, and I'm willing to bet you come on this website in search of people to talk to and not just to shout into the void.

[Anonymous No.22485919]

>>22485622
Asking for basic clarifications is not a fucking gotcha game you useless piece of shit. Simply add something, say something slightly interesting and you have proven my entire hypothesis about hegeltards false. When given the opportunity to say something you start incoherently undermining logic, the very thing you constantly appeal to in every statement and implicitly by the attempt of formalizing anything.
>>22485644
I'm not presupposing anything or denying metaphysics. You can make any kind of appeal you want like when we reference consciousness, a thing not accounted for by any logic. You could but you didn't and won't, you try to build logic castles and then get angry that I call you out for abusing basic logic and demonstrating no understanding of the things you're trying to appeal to and / or undermine.

[Anonymous No.22485936]

>>22485843
you're right anon. I didn't ragequit as a hero as I should have; I stayed here too long and became the villain. all my years here have corrupted my soul. it happened to me, it'll happen to you. Intellektuelle Anschauung is real tho. All this talk is just a means to an end you can't get to without the talk ('I am therefore I think' is the correct formulation; descartes got it backwards). And then once you see the spiritual sun, the invisible sun, the BLACK SUN, Dionysus, God of the Night, you will behold the world of shadows in the Astral Light. Recognize the aim of the sage, the goal of the wise, DIE SACHE SELBST(hint, hint).

(There are you faggots happy now?)

[Anonymous No.22485942]

>>22485936
I'm fucking dying right now.

[Anonymous No.22485955]

>>22485919
>You can make any kind of appeal you want like when we reference consciousness, a thing not accounted for by any logic.
literally accounted for in the Transcendental Logic.

[Anonymous No.22487323]

>>22485768
does this look like a charity? Phenomenology is what, 700 pages? READ IT. you would never survive the ivory tower.

[Anonymous No.22487544]

>>22485955
No it is not and you're braindead.

[Anonymous No.22487557]

>>22487323
>you would never survive the ivory tower.
Good, FUCK academia.